Martha Valdez-Gomez v. Eric Holder, Jr., No. 13-60610 (5th Cir. 2014)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

Case: 13-60610 Document: 00512658217 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/10/2014 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit No. 13-60610 Summary Calendar FILED June 10, 2014 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk MARTHA VALDEZ-GOMEZ, Petitioner v. ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., U. S. ATTORNEY GENERAL, Respondent Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals BIA No. A200 237 571 Before BENAVIDES, CLEMENT, and OWEN, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Martha Valdez-Gomez, a native and citizen of Mexico, seeks a petition for review of the order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) affirming the immigration judge s (IJ) denial of her application for cancellation of removal pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1229b. She asserts that the BIA abused its discretion in agreeing with the IJ s hardship determination regarding the Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4. * Case: 13-60610 Document: 00512658217 Page: 2 Date Filed: 06/10/2014 No. 13-60610 effect that her removal would have on her children who are United States citizens. We generally review only the BIA s decision except to the extent that the IJ s decision influences the BIA. Zhu v. Gonzales, 493 F.3d 588, 593 (5th Cir. 2007). With respect to the determination that Gomez-Valdez failed to demonstrate that her children would suffer an exceptional and extremely unusual hardship as required under § 1229b(b)(1), Gomez-Valdez does not raise any constitutional issues or purely legal questions, and her argument amounts to little more than a disagreement with the weighing and consideration of the relevant factors by the IJ and the BIA; therefore, we lack jurisdiction to review this purely discretionary decision. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(B)(i); Sung v. Keisler, 505 F.3d 372, 377 (5th Cir. 2007); Bravo v. Ashcroft, 341 F.3d 590, 593 (5th Cir. 2003). Accordingly, we DISMISS Valdez- Gomez s petition for review for WANT OF JURISDICTION. 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.